Forum: Author Hangout

I try to keep all of my chapters in a story about the same length and try for over 15 Word pages, which translates to about 40KB. I never considered a minimum length for the reason you mentioned.

As a reader that length should give me a good impression about the story. Authors who write shorter chapters should consider to post 2 chapters when they first post for a new story. Definitely if the first is a prologue, no matter how long the prologue is.

As a reader that length should give me a good impression about the story. Authors who write shorter chapters should consider to post 2 chapters when they first post for a new story. Definitely if the first is a prologue, no matter how long the prologue is.

Prologues are like Forewords, they might be relevant, but they're not the actual story (i.e. introducing the character and building the story), so I typically include them before (i.e. as part of) my normal chapter posting.

As REP said, my target is about 35k which works out to about 6,000 words; one chapter topped out at 45k. The story I'm working on will also have a 7k prologue.

I've never specifically 'weighed' my files. I keep tabs on the word count, subtracting the extraneous epigraphs and section headers (after all, they're not my words), but there are two distinct camps.

One is the SOL pages camp, which feels that they need to dump a certain amount, regardless of content (i.e. whether the chapter actually says that much), while there's another--mostly us 'publishing' types--who write whatever the chapter requires, regardless of size.

My recent The Holes Binding Us Together had two pre-teen protagonists, so the sentences and dialogues were much shorter than normal, resulting in smaller file sizes. After multiple posting failures, I finally reposted combining the first especially short opening chapters as a single file (readers were bitching about NEVER reading another tale if that's all there is to one), but that line is notoriously fuzzy.

But, generally, since I write episodic chapters (i.e. chapters that focus on a specific event, rather than the largely unfocused 'day in the life' chapters, I'm reticent to 'repackage' things for any one site (though I have prepared 'safe' chapters for Finestories, but that's a separate case.

@Switch

Yikes, I've posted the first 5 chapters of my current novel and they total 58K. The first chapter was around 11K (2,166 words).

But I don't write a novel with SOL in mind, that is, posting a chapter a week. I write it for the person who has the entire novel so if he wants to read more he just turns the page.

That's more akin to my thinking. Rather than attacking authors who don't post a specific number of SOL pages, just wait until the story has been posting a while so you're guaranteed to have a sufficient quality? Is that really so onerous?

A first chapter of 10,000+ words is bad writing. It's a novelette in its own right.

That depends on the over-all length of the complete work. That might even be a little short if the complete work is a 1M word epic.

I don't give much thought deciding when to begin a new chapter. It just feels right to me. In my case, it's usually a time change.

The usual difference is between those who write DITL (day-in-the-life of) chapters vs. writing episodic chapters. With DITL chapters, you start out when someone wakes and following EVERYTHING the character does for the entire day, often including such banalities as brushing their teeth, fixing breakfast and visiting the rest room. The main benefit of episodic chapters is that it's focused on one specific event, so once that event completes, the chapter is done. That eliminates the majority of 'fluff', as you cut out ANYTHING that doesn't advance that ONE episode and/or which doesn't advance/build the whole story is some way.

In one, you write until they fall asleep at night, regardless of how much happened that day, in the other you write about one particular conflict, despite how much (or how little) it involves.

Let me clarify my example. It's not a DITL chapter. It's an event chapter even though they fall asleep. Actually, in the last chapter I wrote they didn't fall asleep. They finished making love.

Yeah, I'm familiar enough with your writing style to envision how you'd get there, but I was addressing the larger question of what typically differentiates varying chapter lengths. (i.e. does the author seem to cut the extraneous details, or is there an effort of add more to it).

It was a full-length novel, probably closer to 80,000 words than 60,000. It had 3 chapters.

Yeah, those chapters are too big. On the other hand would it really be any better if the same text was divided into 40 chapters?

It was a full-length novel, probably closer to 80,000 words than 60,000. It had 3 chapters.

Yeah, those chapters are too big.

Why? Because of the time it takes someone to read more than 25,000 words? Or something else?

Why? Because of the time it takes someone to read more than 25,000 words? Or something else?

Something else.

My personal opinion is that chapter sizes (or at leas the average chapter size) should be somewhat proportional to the overall length of the work.

The majority of the dead tree novels I read are in the range of 15-30 chapters.

ETA: They also tend to be a bit longer, in the 100K to 150K word range.

The only justification for longer chapters in a longer story is if the author has padded it out with extra content.

Bullshit. A 400K work epic with none of the kind of deliberate padding you describe (and yes they exist) divided into 50 or a 100 short chapters is just fucking annoying.

That makes for equal size chapters.

I'm not really advocating equal size chapters. As I said, I really judge it more by the average chapter size rather than the individual chapter sizes.

So if you have one or two small chapters out of two dozen chapters in a novel length work, that's not bothersome.

When it becomes bothersome is when you start going over 4 dozen chapters in something smaller than a 500+ kiloword epic.

If you are doing episodic chapters and it takes you 3 dozen episodes to get to the end of a story that totals under 80KW, you are probably building episodes around a bunch of relatively trivial events.

That's why I said earlier chapter length is genre dependent.

I don't disagree with that, but even independent of the genre, I think it's also dependent on the overall length of the work.

you are probably building episodes around a bunch of relatively trivial events.

Chapter 37: French Toast or Steak and Eggs for Breakfast?
Chapter 42: Pee now, or wait for the next exit?
Chapter 52: Quit reading now, or hope this story finally arrives somewhere worthwhile?

I don't abide by it (my chapters vary in length), but I've read many times that the chapter break is arbitrary and one way to do it is to decide how many chapters you want, divide the total word count by it, and then choose a chapter break near that resulting number. That makes for equal size chapters.

I have never once taken that approach, with any story that I've ever written. I have a specific beginning, middle, end and over all theme and conflict for each chapter, just as each of my books do, and I know when I've reached the end, because the current conflict is resolved, leaving additional unresolved conflicts to be addressed in subsequent chapters. I put a LOT of work into structuring my stories, rather than simply tagging along, allowing my characters to dictate where my stories go.

Character can drive any story, as they often know the story better than the author does, but if the story is left up to them, the story will drift, shift, ebb and flow, rather than focus on the core principles of the story.

Many of the chapters simply revolve around the investigation, clues

The search for clues could be considered a kind of conflict. The mind of the investigator vs the mind of the villain.

No conflict in that chapter, but it has important information for the reader and moves the plot forward

The conflict there is between the two characters. Again, a conflict doesn't necessarily mean two people going toe-to-toe, merely that there's a problem to be resolved, and it's that 'mystery', and the hunger for an answer, that propels the story forward.

Thus, the tension is ongoing, and each clue triggers new questions rather than easing the pressure on the investigator, shifting focus. So, each chapter becomes a mini-conflict between the different components of the overall mystery, as the protagonist tries to figure out WTH is going on and who to charge before they (supposedly) kill again. Thus, taking too long to piece one individual clue together could cost people their lives, again ratcheting up the story tension.

I don't have conflict in each chapter. The novel I'm posting now is a thriller/mystery. Many of the chapters simply revolve around the investigation, clues, etc. The thriller part often has conflicts in chapter, but not the mystery part.

Often, the conflict can be over each new clue, as solving one often leads to new 'leads', producing further clues, keeping the tensions percolating. But as long as they're struggling with the mystery, there's tension as the investigators wrestle with their limited knowledge of the subject and are still struggling with the identify of the criminal/murderer. Thus each new clue often leads them in a new direction, shedding new light on the investigation while also ratcheting up the overall tension (not to mention their police departments tension, as they're in a rush to calm the public).

A conflict isn't always between the protagonist and antagonist, more often, it's internal, as one wrestles with how best to resolve the larger crisis, often trying one thing after another, looking for the best approach. But each represents a new conflict, a new approach and a new target, and they try to unravel the larger mystery. "Am I barking up the wrong tree" is often a pretty compelling conflict, especially if you include a police lieutenant, yelling at them to 'stop wasting time and solve this damn case!'

That doesn't make sense to me. The only justification for longer chapters in a longer story is if the author has padded it out with extra content. And a good editor should sort that out.

Editors generally don't dictate content, they focus on specific issues (is this the best phrasing for this sentence, does this passage lead into the next one, is this chapter too far afield, or not backed up by what preceded it. Content is the author's exclusive domain, while editors focus on smoothing over the rough edges in a document.

Some chapters are necessarily longer than others, while some are, by definition, extremely short. That's not a matter of word count, it's all content based, and writing to a specific word count simply means the author has NO off switch, and it looking for an external guidance for when to finally lay their virtual pen down and call it a night.

Watch the movie "Genius" with Jude Law (Thomas Wolfe) and Colin Firth (Max Perkins - his editor). When Wolfe brought his manuscript to the publisher, the boxes filled Perkins' office. Perkins slashed the size of the novel, getting rid of all the unnecessary words, and Wolfe had a bestseller.

That may be, but the days of the Publisher's editors are long gone, and few carry the clout to get away with hacking someone's work apart. They only get away with it if it's assured the author will never be published unless they bow to the will of the editor. But now that they're typically paid by the author's themselves, who can always hire someone else, it's a rarity that editors will exercise that much 'editorial control' anymore.

It used to happen frequently, but not much anymore.

The majority of the dead tree novels I read are in the range of 15-30 chapters.

My books all seem to fall with in the 20-some chapter range, while my (more recent) books tend to fall into the 60,000 to 140,000 word range.

ETA: They also tend to be a bit longer, in the 100K to 150K word range.

That varies widely by genre, rather than content. Historical dramas and sci-fi/fantasy tend to be within that range, because they're so focused on establishing the social norms of the time, or world-building, but most other genres tend to be much shorter than that!

One of the worst examples I read was a dead tree police/crime drama, presumably edited by a professional. It was a full-length novel, probably closer to 80,000 words than 60,000. It had 3 chapters.

I can picture it now: Chapter 1: The Beginning, Chapter 2: The Middle and Chapter 3: The End. Not a lot of thought dedicate to structure, just a mess of words all competing with one another.

My chapters run from 6000 to 7000 words. That seems to work out OK.

Anyone who's merely adding words to get to a specific limit is wasting the readers' time. If it fits the story, then it doesn't matter how few or many words it is, but adding 'fluff' to make it an 'acceptable length' is a waste of time. That's not a story, that's more akin to knitting, time spent keeping your hands busy.

Anyone who's merely adding words to get to a specific limit is wasting the readers' time. If it fits the story, then it doesn't matter how few or many words it is, but adding 'fluff' to make it an 'acceptable length' is a waste of time. That's not a story, that's more akin to knitting, time spent keeping your hands busy.

No one said anything about adding words to get to a specific limit. Perhaps Michael's story chapters just flow in a way that the natural break happens at 6K to 7K

No one said anything about adding words to get to a specific limit. Perhaps Michael's story chapters just flow in a way that the natural break happens at 6K to 7K

It's more the focus, on 'getting to' a specific arbitrary limit, as opposed to writing and then dealing with what you have. If you have a given standard, then you'll necessarily be focused on meeting that goal, by whatever means necessary. They might not mean to pad it with fluff, but even if they decide to not edit down a few overly long exchanges, it will likely hurt the story in the end.

That said, if he's merely looking for guidance, as the opening entry suggested, then it's a reasonable question: but again, that's usually dictated by the author's background (i.e. are they telling a specific story, or just posting something to keep readers busy).

But, in general, the main limitations are SOL readers who can only access stories via a FREE account (and are thus to how many stories they can read in a day). Wasting that allotment for a mere 1,000 or 2,000 words is beyond frustrating, so it's wise to aim for the 4,000 to 8,000 range. At 14,000 the SOL engine automatically chops it in two, so it also makes sense to keep it under that (so you're choosing the chapter sizes and not an automated system).

It doesn't break it into different chapters, it simply breaks it into how many pages will display.

Understood, but it's still an arbitrary break, and whenever readers see a break, they tend to think "Hmm, bathroom, drink, or walk around the block?" Thus, I like to pick where my breaks fall, either through simple breaks like section breaks (lines at the end of each section of a chapter) or full chapter breaks (typically when a specific mini-conflict is resolved).

Understood, but it's still an arbitrary break

No more arbitrary than page breaks in a dead tree book.

and whenever readers see a break, they tend to think "Hmm, bathroom, drink, or walk around the block?"

Any reader who thinks about a bathroom break or getting a drink every time they finish a page in a book needs to be talking to their primary care doctor about it.

Understood, but it's still an arbitrary break

No more arbitrary than page breaks in a dead tree book.

I treat chapter breaks the same way that I treat dividing on massive sage into a series of individual novels. You break it by content, but more specifically, each book/chapter has its own conflict. There's always an overall 'series' conflict between good and evil, for to stand on their own, each book must have it's own focus, based on the central conflict of that part of the larger story.

Chapters are the same, the overall conflicts apply, but each chapter has it's own internal conflicts, so you take what led up to that point, focus on the conflict not all the minutia that got you there, and write until the mini-conflict is resolved, then move on. That's easier to focus on that 'have I written too many/too few words for this chapter yet?

That's why chapter lengths are SO variable, because it's based on context and not on more or less words. Each chapter is unique, and if the mini-conflict can be resolved in only 2,000 words, then it's fine. If it can't, then break it down into separate stages or components of the larger conflict.

The allowance isn't what it used to be anymore. At 100 stories per day, it's not a real problem anymore.

Did it boost or hurt premium memberships?

Anyone who's merely adding words to get to a specific limit is wasting the readers' time. If it fits the story, then it doesn't matter how few or many words it is, but adding 'fluff' to make it an 'acceptable length' is a waste of time. That's not a story, that's more akin to knitting, time spent keeping your hands busy.

Currently, the worst offenders for that kind of thing are found on RR. Several of them are also fluffing page count. Example:

Harry ran over the goat.

Sally asked Harry, "why did you run over the goat?"

"Just because," Harry stated.

"Hmmm" said Sally.

Triple space page fluffing with multiple six or less word sentences. That's on top of fluffing actual word count with banal sentences that add nothing.

If it fits the story, then it doesn't matter how few or many words it is, but adding 'fluff' to make it an 'acceptable length' is a waste of time.

Taking a hedge trimmer to it to reduce it to an 'acceptable length' is equally a waste of time.

Taking a hedge trimmer to it to reduce it to an 'acceptable length' is equally a waste of time.

Agreed, but in the end, a story is merely as long as it takes to tell the story. If the story ends in only 10 chapters, or 30,000 words, then that's the length of that particular story.

Of course, chapters always grow once you go back and start putting in descriptions, background and context, and then shrink once you start cutting the 'unnecessary bits', and once the editors whittle it down, so for most chapters, it's a continually changing range. Thus I'm always suspicious when anyone states that I always write 6,000 or 12,000 words. The question then is usually "and how to you get to that number of words?"

Taking a hedge trimmer to remove content that doesn't advance the story isn't a waste of time though.

Perhaps, but I rather doubt we would agree on anything even close to an objective standard for "doesn't advance the story".

Taking a hedge trimmer to remove content that doesn't advance the story isn't a waste of time though.

A hedge-trimmer is a terrible analogy, though. When you're dealing with individual words and phrases, you're in the scalpel range in terms of focus. What you're referring to is recognizing when story threads go off track, not advancing the story nor furthering the characters, and those are best attacked not with a hedge clipper, but which a chain saw, as you simply cut off the wayward branch which is pulling the entire tree down. It will never be balanced until you get it growing straight where the light can nourish it.

There are no rules. Do whatever works for the story.

This. As a reader I prefer "Do whatever works for the story", not a specific word count, not a set number of pages.

I can't think of any reason, other than to satisfy DS's preference, that two thirds of the chapter breaks should be removed in the combined version.

1. Yes, the combined work runs around 62 chapters and I did talk about a 400KW epic with 50+ chapters, but the combined LOR isn't a 400KW epic, it's a nearly 600KW epic.

2. Publishing it in one binding makes it an anthology which I would judge somewhat differently.

it's a nearly 600KW epic.

Just how many kilowatts is the typical novel, and how does the wattage vary based on genre? Is Romance a lower or higher efficiency than a mystery?

Just how many kilowatts is the typical novel, and how does the wattage vary based on genre? Is Romance a lower or higher efficiency than a mystery?

I'm pretty sure I gave good indication up thread that I'm ussing KW for Kilowords not Kilowatts.

2. Publishing it in one binding makes it an anthology which I would judge somewhat differently.

It's not, actually. The "Lord of the Rings trilogy" is a single novel that was broken into three pieces for practical publication reasons.

Tad Williams's To Green Angel Tower, similarly, is a single novel, and published as such in hardcover, but the paperback was broken into two pieces, because paperback binding techniques physically could not handle a 1600+ page tome.

Various versions of The Three Musketeers have the same story broken into books in different ways, too.

The "Lord of the Rings trilogy" is a single novel that was broken into three pieces for practical publication reasons.

Cite required. I've read a number of sources that say Tolkien himself made the decision to make it three books.

Cite required. I've read a number of sources that say Tolkien himself made the decision to make it three books.

The Lord of the Rings is actually divided into six books, plus appendices and index, usually broken into three physical volumes: 2, 2, and 2+appendices.

Cite: The Lord of the Rings

The Lord of the Rings is actually divided into six books, plus appendices and index, usually broken into three physical volumes: 2, 2, and 2+appendices.

Cite: The Lord of the Rings

Sorry, that says nothing at all about whether Tolkien made the decision to divide it that way or whether it was done as you claim " for practical publication reasons".

It's not, actually. The "Lord of the Rings trilogy" is a single novel that was broken into three pieces for practical publication reasons.

No. The three books took years to be published, and they received a frosty reception, not just from reviews, but from readers as well, especially since the concept of elves, drawfs and gnomes as characters wasn't yet established, other than in fairy tales, and there was little indication that the following books would ever make it to print.

The books only became popular once they were rediscovered, nearly forty years later, in the late nineteen sixties and a new generation of young college kids ready to sink their teeth into meatier reading that reflecting their changing values, which were much more idealistic than their parents' were.

The books were NEVER intended as a single novel, and were only combined long after they became popular and had already been republished multiple times.

Tolkien originally wanted Lord of the Rings and The Silmarillion published in two volumes, but the publisher wouldn't go for it, so Lord of the Rings was first published in three volumes in 1954—1955. Not, as you imply, in the 1920s. Tolkien originally didn't even want the volumes to have their own titles; just "Lord of the Rings Volume 1", "... Volume 2"... with subtitles of the two books contained in each volume.

The Silmarillion was put off, and eventually published posthumously in 1977. The first single-volume edition of Lord of the Rings, the way Tolkien wanted it to be published, was released in 1968.

If you want some actual information with citations, instead of just making stuff up, this is all in the first page that comes up if you google "Lord of the Rings".

According to wikipedia (spit!), Tolkien intended LotR to be published in a single volume but it's actually comprised of six books.

The One Wiki to Rule Them All agrees on six books.

This. As a reader I prefer "Do whatever works for the story", not a specific word count, not a set number of pages.

Despite the various arguments, i think that most of us can agree on this, but for those who haven't yet learned how to structure their stories, they're generally looking for an arbitrary guide for when a chapter has been going on for too long.

As a reader I prefer "Do whatever works for the story", not a specific word count, not a set number of pages.

As a reader, I prefer more to read rather than less. Short chapters are not as good as longer ones.

As a reader, I prefer more to read rather than less. Short chapters are not as good as longer ones.

That's the general feeling among SOL readers, who'll typically only read a single chapter at a time of an unfolding story, so they want something solid that they can chew on and that will occupy several hours as they wrestle with it.

However, once it's posted, the focus becomes exclusively the entire story, rather than how long any given chapter is. And the actual posting time is short given how long the story is likely to remain on SOL. In fact, many authors now won't even turn on voting until the story is solidly underway, to avoid the initial 'Oh God, you call THIS a damn story!' reactions.

As a reader, I prefer more to read rather than less. Short chapters are not as good as longer ones.

I don't mind short chapters. I usually wait until a book is finished before I start reading so I can just continue with the next chapter.

There are no rules. Do whatever works for the story.

I disagree (kinda), do whatever works best for you.

If you feel that a chapter break needs to go there. Then it does. if you feel that it needs to hold off until you are done with an interconnected scene or three, then it does.

I write full stories. not single chapters that look good after a post where a few days later they will expect the same.

Full books vs individual titilizations. (however you spell that word.)

I have chapter lengths ranging from 2400W to 16KW (grin). it all depended on what i believed fit. not what kept teh interest of one of hundreds of my readers.

Shad

And if I know in advance there's sequels, i prefer to wait for the final book to begin reading.

Alas, that doesn't exactly help authors, as often, it'll take multiple years to complete any given series, especially if each book has a unique focus, rather than merely continuing on without changing anything.

If no one read the first book in a series, an author is likely to abandon it, rather than pouring more effort into a failed book concept. Plus, most of my "series" only grow beyond the one book months or even years after it's completed, as I suddenly discover new directions to take the older story in. Some stories start out and multi-book series, while others naturally grow and expand on their own.

it'll take multiple years to complete any given series

No shit. That's part of my reason. When I gave up on starting unfinished series, I was already waiting for the conclusions of Wheel of Time, Song of Ice and Fire, and Sword of Truth. And the Recluce novels, but mostly those were episodic in nature, and not really consecutive. Or the Discworld novels. (Of course, I think only one of those authors is actually alive now.)

I can't see third person ever being tricky, especially compared to second. Maybe a second person future tense, with the narrator being a disembodied time travelling version of your future self who just tells you what's about to happen? Not appealing.

The first chapter is one of the very short ones. The reader hostility level should be illuminating.

In such a case just wait until you have the second chapter and then post those two. I can understand why a lot of readers might not like such a short first chapter and no next chapter to get a better idea of where the story is going. Although I still don't understand how some readers can express such hostility over something they get for free and can choose to read or not.

I put a note at the end of the story description (removed on completion) warning of short chapters. That seems to have disarmed most of the objections.

funniest thing i read all day

Shad

Although I still don't understand how some readers can express such hostility over something they get for free and can choose to read or not.

To me this isn't a surprise I help out with donating food to those in need and the only requirement is that you have proof that you live with in the area. Not all but there is still a large number that complain that we have this requirement or it is the day and time that we do the hand out as well as the location not to mention what brands, types, or the amount of food we are giving out. It is just some peoples nature to complain as it doesn't matter to them you being the author how much Time, Effort, and MONEY yes your own money for the PC, internet, ect.. ect.. to them you are there just to serve them and cater to their needs and wishes alone.

To ALL AUTHORS and the ADMIN and STAFF

Thank You for Your Time and Effort

Matthew R. Smith